Drug and alcohol review · 2025
Substance-involved child-to-parent violence.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Harries Travis, Mayshak Richelle, Skvarc David, Eckhardt Christopher, Benstead Michelle, Miller Peter, Curtis Ashlee
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Child-to-parent violence (CPV) is associated with youth substance problems; however, CPV which is substance-involved (SU-CPV) is specifically excluded from the consensus definition of CPV and few studies have explored the familial context surrounding SU-CPV. This study utilised the I3 model to explore associations between parental monitoring, parental intrusiveness, affective reactivity, concurrent reactive CPV and SU-CPV in an Australian community sample of caregivers.
METHODS: A total of 119 caregivers experiencing abusive CPV (frequent and severe) completed an online survey reporting on incidence of CPV from 12 to 24-year-olds under their care, parenting behaviours, traits of the young person and their experience of SU-CPV.
RESULTS: Poor parental monitoring was positively associated with SU-CPV, and this relationship was stronger at higher levels of affective reactivity in the young person. There were no significant three-way interactions.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: SU-CPV may be most likely to occur where opportunity for child substance use is high, and risk of escalation is also high. These findings should be used to inform current CPV intervention, which may otherwise neglect youth substance use.
METHODS: A total of 119 caregivers experiencing abusive CPV (frequent and severe) completed an online survey reporting on incidence of CPV from 12 to 24-year-olds under their care, parenting behaviours, traits of the young person and their experience of SU-CPV.
RESULTS: Poor parental monitoring was positively associated with SU-CPV, and this relationship was stronger at higher levels of affective reactivity in the young person. There were no significant three-way interactions.
DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: SU-CPV may be most likely to occur where opportunity for child substance use is high, and risk of escalation is also high. These findings should be used to inform current CPV intervention, which may otherwise neglect youth substance use.